![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
I have added a reference regarding her parents from The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. I don't think they can be accused of lying, and I don't think her father's obituary was published in the press as he must've been a private citizen, so would you please remove the block and let this go on the front page for DYK? And I will no longer submit articles for DYK, because it takes up too much time. But I think this one should make it to the front page. Thank you. Zigzig20s ( talk) 11:06, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
[1] EEng ( talk) 13:51, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your attention. I've already edited the article based on the mentioned items. But the problem is that I'd like to change the hook. is it possible? The new Hook will be as such:
Mhhossein ( talk) 05:07, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi BlueMoonset, I doubt you want to know this, but I thought I'd tell you in case you do (and apologies if you don't): started review of old DYK nom of three articles here. Thanks, Mat ty. 007 15:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey, can you have a look at the entry for De Akkermolen? Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 01:10, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for the late reply,I was a bit busy at the time.I agree with the decision. Catlemur ( talk) 20:51, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello BlueMoonset,
I was browsing some articles that had been sent to DYK before becoming GA's, and became curious of this: after an article has previously been in DYK, can it ever be submitted again? Examples:
Figured you'd know. Thanks in advance.
Snuggums ( talk / edits) 20:34, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
I think we've got a problem with enthusiastic reviewer Papajeckloy -- see Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Shah_Rukh_Khan and Template:Did you know nominations/Michael Zearott, plus his own nominations. I don't really know how to raise this. But you're hard-hearted with nerves of steel, so you'll know what to do. EEng ( talk) 22:06, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm hoping that you adding the reviews in block quotes doesn't ruin the 5x expansion. DYK check doesn't detect them. SL93 ( talk) 21:49, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello Blue: It seems to me there is a disconnect between the GA nominating process and the post-GA approvals. Am I correct? To explain, we get articles listed at Category:Uncategorized good articles because the approved GA has "|subtopic=" used. An example is Talk:Gasketball. It is listed with subtopic "Video game". Did Gasketball start off with Video game as the subtopic in the nomination? If so, then the nominating templates should be the same as the approved results template. I ask because of the change you made here. Thanks. – S. Rich ( talk) 01:15, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, could you enlighten me as to the new policy that Belle is citing? I was under the impression that if the reviewer suggests an ALT hook, s/he cannot approve the nomination. Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 09:55, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, please see note on your review, Thanks -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) ( talk) 11:50, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, please see note on your review, Thanks -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) ( talk) 11:50, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Please kindly check if there is any problems left in the article, because the copyedit problem you stated is now fixed, my request on the Guild of Copy Editors is granted and the page is now majorly copyedited. -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) ( talk) 05:31, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, please see note on your review, Thanks -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) ( talk) 11:06, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
The Mandarax Barnstar of Excellence | |
BlueMoonset, I am pleased to award this long-overdue MBE to you in recognition of your outstanding contributions as the DYK MVP. You are easily the most knowledgeable, helpful, sensible, useful, essential person working on DYK. Your contributions to discussions are always well thought out, rational, intelligent, and logical, and virtually always correct (according to the Mandarax Scale of Correctness). I long ago put your redlinked RfA on my watchlist for my future support – the only such RfA on my watchlist. (I know you've been asked to run on various occasions and have declined, and I'm not asking now; just noting that you've got my strong support if you ever change your mind.) I could go on and on (yes, the above is me not going on and on), but I'll simply end by thanking you for all of your superb contributions. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:48, 27 August 2014 (UTC) |
Hi, I add some references to the article that I was nominated it for DYK section. Please take a look and see is it right.-- LordMilan85 ( talk) 12:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
I have responded to the request on the template talk page. I hope I didn't completely misinterpret the comment by Casliber. If you have any additional comments, I'll make another try. Thanks for your interest. Bruin2 ( talk) 04:29, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
I took care of it. Daniel Case ( talk) 20:02, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
On your recent edits to The Blood of Olympus; I understand that he is American and is entitled to mdy and it was wrong of me to apply dmy (I'm just used to it). Rick Riordan has books with various covers: some American that use American English, some British that use British English. Removing the file made no sense as all covers symbolise the book. Me using dmy and you removing a file on such a basis seems very biased on both sides. - Esmost πአלϰ 03:20, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I'm sure that you have encountered this guy many times in WP:DYK. Ever since I nominated and overhauled this article in DYK, which incidentally he created, he wants to take "all" of the credit for that and even bashed me in my talk page, telling me that I "stole" his opportunity, where in the first place, the only thing he did on that article is to create it. Then after that incident, he nominated every single article he created to DYK, even if it is full of grammatical and factual errors and contain mostly original research. Now, there's an incident in one of his self-nominated articles ( Template:Did you know nominations/Juan Karlos Labajo), where he harassed the creator of the article in his talk page. ( See this very lengthy discussion) Then after a few days, a new editor User:EtitsNgKabayo (which by the way is Filipino for "horse's dick") passed the article's nomination. I do believe this is one of Jeckloy's sockpuppets. I want to report this user to ANI but I would like to ask your opinion about it since I think you knew his mannerisms after the bunch of DYK nominations he created and you have reviewed. - WayKurat ( talk) 12:56, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
The last time I was aware of a similar situation, I left a note – WT:Did you know/Archive 66#BabbaQ's sockpuppets – listing five known instances where socks verified the user's own nominations (and there certainly could have been others). In this case, the sockpuppetry was CheckUser-confirmed. Although I didn't mention it in my post, I thought that the consequence should be a permanent ban from all aspects of DYK. The actual result? Absolutely nothing. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:35, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I've nominated a DYK here. The article title is The Fifteen Whispered Prayers (Munajat) and I've proposed two hooks. Could you please review my nomination? Mhhossein ( talk) 05:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey, thank you for your message :) Well, my only problem is I'm not sure if my source is really good for Wikipedia, that's why i did not add it yet :/ It is this one: http://www.mjsbigblog.com/glee-season-6-song-spoilers-loser-like-me.htm Do you think it is a good source? :) 86.75.160.150 ( talk) 09:30, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
FYI I refactored your talk page comment as you had inadvertently put the admin in the category which also complicates deletion. Helen Online 09:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
W. Stanley Proctor talk page I would appreciate it if the DYK can be revived. Please consider and take a look at the alternate hook, too. User: Doug Coldwell approved it, too. Although he has not yet seen the final wording. I've left a note on his page so that he can react (he's out of town this instant). 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 18:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
I'd dispute the primary meaning (a critic saying "I very much enjoyed the histrionics of the lead actress in this film" isn't going to endear them to the actress in question), and that clearly isn't what is meant in the review. (It's going to be very dry if reviews can only say actor A's performance was superior to that of actor B; rice cake dry; indigestible [coughs up bits of rice cake and review]) Belle ( talk) 14:14, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I appreciate your supervision on the GA candidates, but when a reviewer abandons the review, such as the David Hume case, the process is considered failed. That means that the article's history should be updated and the article should be re-nominated. Otherwise, the statistician bot report is providing false information, and considers the article to be still on hold.-- Retrohead ( talk) 15:37, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for (calmly) fixing the queues after I forgot to delete a set in prep. Cheers. Victuallers ( talk) 09:17, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Does it seem strange that all 8 of Carlojoseph14's first DYK noms are nominated by Shhhhwwww!!? Is there any way to check if the latter is a sock? Yoninah ( talk) 20:49, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
(This place) - The article talk page is not the place for general discussion of infobox yes or no, like or not, - that was the one good outcome of the Infoboxes case (which you mentioned): "All editors are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions about infoboxes, and to avoid turning discussions about a single article's infobox into a discussion about infoboxes in general" (highlighted by me). The case was requested because of massive reverts of infoboxes, - sadly that aspect was not considered by the arbitrators.
Instead of reverting (and not even to the attempt of a compromise) you should explain why you think the particular work by Bruckner should not have an infobox while most of his other works have one, those of the symphonies dating back to 2007. Reverts are past, additions are present, please compare L'Arianna, Carmen, Il trovatore, on top of my featured article and good articles such as the most recent Magnificat.
A heard a new argument: the infobox is unneccessary. Yes, of course, so are images. Both are mentioned in the standards for B class. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:28, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi BlueMoonset. Thank you very much for your comments and advice on the above nomination. I'm quite interested in the process, do editors now have a period of time to clean up the article and is that what {{subst:DYK?again}} is for or is it simply the article won't pass? - LÒÓkingYourBest( Talk| Edits) 11:08, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Blue,
I have fiddled with this nomination every way I know how, with no result. How about deleting it so I can try again?
Georgejdorner ( talk) 22:46, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Please review
WP:3RR. That concerns reverting edits in articles and edit war behavior. There is no limit to the number of edits a user can make to an article in a 24-hour period, so long as those edits are not repeated reversions of a specific edit by another user.
AldezD (
talk)
11:15, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) WP:3RR says: "An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period." Helen Online 11:42, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
A random act of kindness such as fixing my DYK nom deserves a directed act of gratitude. Thanks for the help. Georgejdorner ( talk) 20:40, 11 October 2014 (UTC) |
All refs fixed, thanks for the reviewing by the way.-- Catlemur ( talk) 21:10, 16 October 2014 (UTC) Remade the delete sections.Any more issues?-- Catlemur ( talk) 12:39, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
I removed it and added the needed citiation.Thanks again for pointing out issues in the article.Cheers.-- Catlemur ( talk) 15:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello BlueMoonset:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable
Halloween!
–
Snuggums (
talk /
edits)
21:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi! Herewith, I want to thank you for your efforts to get the DYK nom passed. Unfortunately, I couldn't be engaged in the process because for a long time I had no access to WP.-- CeeGee 16:19, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi BlueMoonset, I have been trying to do some DYK reviews. Just now I took a look at Template:Did you know nominations/Czech language and have received an interesting response, that it is not required to check all the online citations in the article for paraphrasing/copyright violations. Is this right? I may have been doing too much work :) I'd be grateful if you can let me know what the best practice is for fulfilling the instruction that you get when you hit "edit" for a nomination ("Within policy – meets core policies and guidelines, and in particular: is free of close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations and plagiarism"). Thank you! 184.147.131.89 ( talk) 19:39, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Care to point out which sentence didn't make sense in the article? What do you know about military equipment? Khazar ( talk) 21:44, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi, it looks like we have near-consensus. When can we implement the new rule? :) Yoninah ( talk) 09:12, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
You might be interested in giving input here. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 18:06, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
The central discussion on which of Magnificat (Bach) or Magnificat in D major, BWV 243 should be the content page and which should be the redirect is at Talk:Magnificat (Bach)#Position of main article content. Thought it best to let you know for good order. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 06:24, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I see that you commented on this. I removed the fair-use image, as you suggested. If you can do anything to move this DYK along, I'd be grateful, as it's been sitting there for a long time. -- Ssilvers ( talk) 19:43, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I wanted to say thanks for birddogging that GAN for Danehill Dancer and for giving me time to let the lead editors have a shot at it. Though we may spat a little bit from time to time on stuff, I'm glad you do what you do and I just wanted to say that I acknowledge your hard work and the way you keep an eye on things. Wikignomes are not always appreciated. Montanabw (talk) 03:43, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
The reviewer and I seem to have reached an impasse. I think the remaining bone of contention, which I think will result in a fail if we can't see eye to eye, is that the reviewer thinks that there are too many quotations in the article. See Talk:David Hume/GA3. S/he said that s/he would ask for a second opinion, but I've seen no sign of this. Is there some way out of this? Myrvin ( talk) 13:34, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
This has been failed, and is on review again. Myrvin ( talk) 11:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
BlueMoonset, Please take a look. Trying to move this along. Thanks. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 14:48, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your care supervising the review of The Manchester Rambler, and sorry the first reviewer did a somewhat skimpy job. I think the (eventual) reviewer will find the article pretty thoroughly prepared with good sources. Anything I can do to help... Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:53, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. I agree. I just nominated it at AFD. Yoninah ( talk) 20:16, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm in the process of adopting the numberal style for episode aboe 10. Please stop following me & reverting. GoodDay ( talk) 20:39, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all in figures. Never mind. Carry on. I'll revert myself. BlueMoonset ( talk) 21:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
As far as I'm concerned this is ready to be sent on. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 22:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!! |
Hello BlueMoonset, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Hello. You may want to take another look at the Mamadou N'Diaye (basketball, born 1993) page, as I have nominated it for good article status. Looking at the heavy revision it saw through its DYK nomination, I feel like it shouldn't be too big of a deal to review. Temple of the Mousy ( talk) 00:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy Holiday Cheer | |
Season's Greetings! Where would DYK be without you? (Nowhere, that's where.) I appreciate your level head, firmness and friendliness in keeping the DYK engines oiled and running. Wishing you a warm and wonderful holiday season. Best, Yoninah ( talk) 15:38, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
Thank you, Yoninah. Happy holidays to you and yours. BlueMoonset ( talk) 19:39, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for improving it. I confirm that it is indeed scored for men's choir (TTBB) and three trombones. -- Réginald alias Meneerke bloem ( To reply) 12:02, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi BlueMoonset,
Thank you for not giving up on this article. It has taken much longer than I expected, but I think I have found at least one source that explains the logistical issue that you had asked to be better documented. I think I need to rewrite the paragraph containing the citation needed flag. It will take another day or so to incorporate the info into the article so that it reads well, but if that is the only issue remaining, we are very near the goal. I'll notify you when I have completed the task. Bruin2 ( talk) 06:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
BlueMoonset,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Snuggums (
talk /
edits)
05:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much indeed. it is my firs DYK and I don't have enough experience. please help me if there's something else. M.Sakhaie 16:43, 8 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.Sakhaie ( talk • contribs)
Hi BlueMoonset. I've been advised to have a chat with you by Yoninah after encountering a problem with how to sign off my DYK reviews.
I am visually impaired and edit with the help of a screen magnifier and text-to-speech software, which are great for helping me to build articles, but often mean I'm unable to use some of the tools effectively, particularly when reviewing pages. The main issue I have with DYK concerns the checking of close paraphrasing as text-to-speech doesn't bring up highlighted text, while because I see only a portion of the screen with the magnification software, comparing two versions of a document can be a slow and cumbersome process. I can pick up things such as vandalism through diffs, but anything longer can present difficulties.
This issue did come up a couple of years ago at FAC, where someone advised me to create a disclaimer page explaining the situation. I have done this, and now automatically add it to any review pages I'm involved with. I've filed several DYK reviews since then and it doesn't usually cause an issue, but I understand the rules have been tightened up a lot recently because of several problems with close paraphrasing, and I've been asked about it a couple of times.
I wondered if you could advise me on the best way to tackle this. Yoninah suggested it might be possible for me to request help with things such as paraphrasing checks, but wasn't sure about the best way forward, so thought I should raise the issue with you.
Thanks for your cooperation in this matter, and I look forward to your response. Cheers, This is Paul ( talk) 20:28, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
I have added a reference regarding her parents from The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. I don't think they can be accused of lying, and I don't think her father's obituary was published in the press as he must've been a private citizen, so would you please remove the block and let this go on the front page for DYK? And I will no longer submit articles for DYK, because it takes up too much time. But I think this one should make it to the front page. Thank you. Zigzig20s ( talk) 11:06, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
[1] EEng ( talk) 13:51, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your attention. I've already edited the article based on the mentioned items. But the problem is that I'd like to change the hook. is it possible? The new Hook will be as such:
Mhhossein ( talk) 05:07, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi BlueMoonset, I doubt you want to know this, but I thought I'd tell you in case you do (and apologies if you don't): started review of old DYK nom of three articles here. Thanks, Mat ty. 007 15:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey, can you have a look at the entry for De Akkermolen? Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 01:10, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for the late reply,I was a bit busy at the time.I agree with the decision. Catlemur ( talk) 20:51, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello BlueMoonset,
I was browsing some articles that had been sent to DYK before becoming GA's, and became curious of this: after an article has previously been in DYK, can it ever be submitted again? Examples:
Figured you'd know. Thanks in advance.
Snuggums ( talk / edits) 20:34, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
I think we've got a problem with enthusiastic reviewer Papajeckloy -- see Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Shah_Rukh_Khan and Template:Did you know nominations/Michael Zearott, plus his own nominations. I don't really know how to raise this. But you're hard-hearted with nerves of steel, so you'll know what to do. EEng ( talk) 22:06, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm hoping that you adding the reviews in block quotes doesn't ruin the 5x expansion. DYK check doesn't detect them. SL93 ( talk) 21:49, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello Blue: It seems to me there is a disconnect between the GA nominating process and the post-GA approvals. Am I correct? To explain, we get articles listed at Category:Uncategorized good articles because the approved GA has "|subtopic=" used. An example is Talk:Gasketball. It is listed with subtopic "Video game". Did Gasketball start off with Video game as the subtopic in the nomination? If so, then the nominating templates should be the same as the approved results template. I ask because of the change you made here. Thanks. – S. Rich ( talk) 01:15, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, could you enlighten me as to the new policy that Belle is citing? I was under the impression that if the reviewer suggests an ALT hook, s/he cannot approve the nomination. Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 09:55, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, please see note on your review, Thanks -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) ( talk) 11:50, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, please see note on your review, Thanks -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) ( talk) 11:50, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Please kindly check if there is any problems left in the article, because the copyedit problem you stated is now fixed, my request on the Guild of Copy Editors is granted and the page is now majorly copyedited. -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) ( talk) 05:31, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, please see note on your review, Thanks -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) ( talk) 11:06, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
The Mandarax Barnstar of Excellence | |
BlueMoonset, I am pleased to award this long-overdue MBE to you in recognition of your outstanding contributions as the DYK MVP. You are easily the most knowledgeable, helpful, sensible, useful, essential person working on DYK. Your contributions to discussions are always well thought out, rational, intelligent, and logical, and virtually always correct (according to the Mandarax Scale of Correctness). I long ago put your redlinked RfA on my watchlist for my future support – the only such RfA on my watchlist. (I know you've been asked to run on various occasions and have declined, and I'm not asking now; just noting that you've got my strong support if you ever change your mind.) I could go on and on (yes, the above is me not going on and on), but I'll simply end by thanking you for all of your superb contributions. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:48, 27 August 2014 (UTC) |
Hi, I add some references to the article that I was nominated it for DYK section. Please take a look and see is it right.-- LordMilan85 ( talk) 12:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
I have responded to the request on the template talk page. I hope I didn't completely misinterpret the comment by Casliber. If you have any additional comments, I'll make another try. Thanks for your interest. Bruin2 ( talk) 04:29, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
I took care of it. Daniel Case ( talk) 20:02, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
On your recent edits to The Blood of Olympus; I understand that he is American and is entitled to mdy and it was wrong of me to apply dmy (I'm just used to it). Rick Riordan has books with various covers: some American that use American English, some British that use British English. Removing the file made no sense as all covers symbolise the book. Me using dmy and you removing a file on such a basis seems very biased on both sides. - Esmost πአלϰ 03:20, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I'm sure that you have encountered this guy many times in WP:DYK. Ever since I nominated and overhauled this article in DYK, which incidentally he created, he wants to take "all" of the credit for that and even bashed me in my talk page, telling me that I "stole" his opportunity, where in the first place, the only thing he did on that article is to create it. Then after that incident, he nominated every single article he created to DYK, even if it is full of grammatical and factual errors and contain mostly original research. Now, there's an incident in one of his self-nominated articles ( Template:Did you know nominations/Juan Karlos Labajo), where he harassed the creator of the article in his talk page. ( See this very lengthy discussion) Then after a few days, a new editor User:EtitsNgKabayo (which by the way is Filipino for "horse's dick") passed the article's nomination. I do believe this is one of Jeckloy's sockpuppets. I want to report this user to ANI but I would like to ask your opinion about it since I think you knew his mannerisms after the bunch of DYK nominations he created and you have reviewed. - WayKurat ( talk) 12:56, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
The last time I was aware of a similar situation, I left a note – WT:Did you know/Archive 66#BabbaQ's sockpuppets – listing five known instances where socks verified the user's own nominations (and there certainly could have been others). In this case, the sockpuppetry was CheckUser-confirmed. Although I didn't mention it in my post, I thought that the consequence should be a permanent ban from all aspects of DYK. The actual result? Absolutely nothing. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:35, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I've nominated a DYK here. The article title is The Fifteen Whispered Prayers (Munajat) and I've proposed two hooks. Could you please review my nomination? Mhhossein ( talk) 05:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey, thank you for your message :) Well, my only problem is I'm not sure if my source is really good for Wikipedia, that's why i did not add it yet :/ It is this one: http://www.mjsbigblog.com/glee-season-6-song-spoilers-loser-like-me.htm Do you think it is a good source? :) 86.75.160.150 ( talk) 09:30, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
FYI I refactored your talk page comment as you had inadvertently put the admin in the category which also complicates deletion. Helen Online 09:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
W. Stanley Proctor talk page I would appreciate it if the DYK can be revived. Please consider and take a look at the alternate hook, too. User: Doug Coldwell approved it, too. Although he has not yet seen the final wording. I've left a note on his page so that he can react (he's out of town this instant). 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 18:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
I'd dispute the primary meaning (a critic saying "I very much enjoyed the histrionics of the lead actress in this film" isn't going to endear them to the actress in question), and that clearly isn't what is meant in the review. (It's going to be very dry if reviews can only say actor A's performance was superior to that of actor B; rice cake dry; indigestible [coughs up bits of rice cake and review]) Belle ( talk) 14:14, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I appreciate your supervision on the GA candidates, but when a reviewer abandons the review, such as the David Hume case, the process is considered failed. That means that the article's history should be updated and the article should be re-nominated. Otherwise, the statistician bot report is providing false information, and considers the article to be still on hold.-- Retrohead ( talk) 15:37, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for (calmly) fixing the queues after I forgot to delete a set in prep. Cheers. Victuallers ( talk) 09:17, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Does it seem strange that all 8 of Carlojoseph14's first DYK noms are nominated by Shhhhwwww!!? Is there any way to check if the latter is a sock? Yoninah ( talk) 20:49, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
(This place) - The article talk page is not the place for general discussion of infobox yes or no, like or not, - that was the one good outcome of the Infoboxes case (which you mentioned): "All editors are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions about infoboxes, and to avoid turning discussions about a single article's infobox into a discussion about infoboxes in general" (highlighted by me). The case was requested because of massive reverts of infoboxes, - sadly that aspect was not considered by the arbitrators.
Instead of reverting (and not even to the attempt of a compromise) you should explain why you think the particular work by Bruckner should not have an infobox while most of his other works have one, those of the symphonies dating back to 2007. Reverts are past, additions are present, please compare L'Arianna, Carmen, Il trovatore, on top of my featured article and good articles such as the most recent Magnificat.
A heard a new argument: the infobox is unneccessary. Yes, of course, so are images. Both are mentioned in the standards for B class. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:28, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi BlueMoonset. Thank you very much for your comments and advice on the above nomination. I'm quite interested in the process, do editors now have a period of time to clean up the article and is that what {{subst:DYK?again}} is for or is it simply the article won't pass? - LÒÓkingYourBest( Talk| Edits) 11:08, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Blue,
I have fiddled with this nomination every way I know how, with no result. How about deleting it so I can try again?
Georgejdorner ( talk) 22:46, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Please review
WP:3RR. That concerns reverting edits in articles and edit war behavior. There is no limit to the number of edits a user can make to an article in a 24-hour period, so long as those edits are not repeated reversions of a specific edit by another user.
AldezD (
talk)
11:15, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) WP:3RR says: "An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period." Helen Online 11:42, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
A random act of kindness such as fixing my DYK nom deserves a directed act of gratitude. Thanks for the help. Georgejdorner ( talk) 20:40, 11 October 2014 (UTC) |
All refs fixed, thanks for the reviewing by the way.-- Catlemur ( talk) 21:10, 16 October 2014 (UTC) Remade the delete sections.Any more issues?-- Catlemur ( talk) 12:39, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
I removed it and added the needed citiation.Thanks again for pointing out issues in the article.Cheers.-- Catlemur ( talk) 15:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello BlueMoonset:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable
Halloween!
–
Snuggums (
talk /
edits)
21:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi! Herewith, I want to thank you for your efforts to get the DYK nom passed. Unfortunately, I couldn't be engaged in the process because for a long time I had no access to WP.-- CeeGee 16:19, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi BlueMoonset, I have been trying to do some DYK reviews. Just now I took a look at Template:Did you know nominations/Czech language and have received an interesting response, that it is not required to check all the online citations in the article for paraphrasing/copyright violations. Is this right? I may have been doing too much work :) I'd be grateful if you can let me know what the best practice is for fulfilling the instruction that you get when you hit "edit" for a nomination ("Within policy – meets core policies and guidelines, and in particular: is free of close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations and plagiarism"). Thank you! 184.147.131.89 ( talk) 19:39, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Care to point out which sentence didn't make sense in the article? What do you know about military equipment? Khazar ( talk) 21:44, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi, it looks like we have near-consensus. When can we implement the new rule? :) Yoninah ( talk) 09:12, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
You might be interested in giving input here. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 18:06, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
The central discussion on which of Magnificat (Bach) or Magnificat in D major, BWV 243 should be the content page and which should be the redirect is at Talk:Magnificat (Bach)#Position of main article content. Thought it best to let you know for good order. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 06:24, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I see that you commented on this. I removed the fair-use image, as you suggested. If you can do anything to move this DYK along, I'd be grateful, as it's been sitting there for a long time. -- Ssilvers ( talk) 19:43, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I wanted to say thanks for birddogging that GAN for Danehill Dancer and for giving me time to let the lead editors have a shot at it. Though we may spat a little bit from time to time on stuff, I'm glad you do what you do and I just wanted to say that I acknowledge your hard work and the way you keep an eye on things. Wikignomes are not always appreciated. Montanabw (talk) 03:43, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
The reviewer and I seem to have reached an impasse. I think the remaining bone of contention, which I think will result in a fail if we can't see eye to eye, is that the reviewer thinks that there are too many quotations in the article. See Talk:David Hume/GA3. S/he said that s/he would ask for a second opinion, but I've seen no sign of this. Is there some way out of this? Myrvin ( talk) 13:34, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
This has been failed, and is on review again. Myrvin ( talk) 11:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
BlueMoonset, Please take a look. Trying to move this along. Thanks. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 14:48, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your care supervising the review of The Manchester Rambler, and sorry the first reviewer did a somewhat skimpy job. I think the (eventual) reviewer will find the article pretty thoroughly prepared with good sources. Anything I can do to help... Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:53, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. I agree. I just nominated it at AFD. Yoninah ( talk) 20:16, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm in the process of adopting the numberal style for episode aboe 10. Please stop following me & reverting. GoodDay ( talk) 20:39, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all in figures. Never mind. Carry on. I'll revert myself. BlueMoonset ( talk) 21:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
As far as I'm concerned this is ready to be sent on. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 22:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!! |
Hello BlueMoonset, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Hello. You may want to take another look at the Mamadou N'Diaye (basketball, born 1993) page, as I have nominated it for good article status. Looking at the heavy revision it saw through its DYK nomination, I feel like it shouldn't be too big of a deal to review. Temple of the Mousy ( talk) 00:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy Holiday Cheer | |
Season's Greetings! Where would DYK be without you? (Nowhere, that's where.) I appreciate your level head, firmness and friendliness in keeping the DYK engines oiled and running. Wishing you a warm and wonderful holiday season. Best, Yoninah ( talk) 15:38, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
Thank you, Yoninah. Happy holidays to you and yours. BlueMoonset ( talk) 19:39, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for improving it. I confirm that it is indeed scored for men's choir (TTBB) and three trombones. -- Réginald alias Meneerke bloem ( To reply) 12:02, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi BlueMoonset,
Thank you for not giving up on this article. It has taken much longer than I expected, but I think I have found at least one source that explains the logistical issue that you had asked to be better documented. I think I need to rewrite the paragraph containing the citation needed flag. It will take another day or so to incorporate the info into the article so that it reads well, but if that is the only issue remaining, we are very near the goal. I'll notify you when I have completed the task. Bruin2 ( talk) 06:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
BlueMoonset,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Snuggums (
talk /
edits)
05:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much indeed. it is my firs DYK and I don't have enough experience. please help me if there's something else. M.Sakhaie 16:43, 8 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.Sakhaie ( talk • contribs)
Hi BlueMoonset. I've been advised to have a chat with you by Yoninah after encountering a problem with how to sign off my DYK reviews.
I am visually impaired and edit with the help of a screen magnifier and text-to-speech software, which are great for helping me to build articles, but often mean I'm unable to use some of the tools effectively, particularly when reviewing pages. The main issue I have with DYK concerns the checking of close paraphrasing as text-to-speech doesn't bring up highlighted text, while because I see only a portion of the screen with the magnification software, comparing two versions of a document can be a slow and cumbersome process. I can pick up things such as vandalism through diffs, but anything longer can present difficulties.
This issue did come up a couple of years ago at FAC, where someone advised me to create a disclaimer page explaining the situation. I have done this, and now automatically add it to any review pages I'm involved with. I've filed several DYK reviews since then and it doesn't usually cause an issue, but I understand the rules have been tightened up a lot recently because of several problems with close paraphrasing, and I've been asked about it a couple of times.
I wondered if you could advise me on the best way to tackle this. Yoninah suggested it might be possible for me to request help with things such as paraphrasing checks, but wasn't sure about the best way forward, so thought I should raise the issue with you.
Thanks for your cooperation in this matter, and I look forward to your response. Cheers, This is Paul ( talk) 20:28, 11 January 2015 (UTC)